OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Shane Gillis SNL Monologue on Womens Gym Attire Sparks Backlash

6 sources · updated 2026-10-15
Left 17% Center 17% Right 67%
1 left · 1 center · 4 right

What happened

On Saturday, comedian Shane Gillis hosted NBC’s Saturday Night Live for the third time. In a roughly seven-minute opening monologue he said he “didn’t know women just dress like whores now” at the gym, described neon shorts women were wearing, and said men are “not allowed to look” because they may appear in TikTok videos. On Sunday, actor Dan Levy posted an Instagram video condemning the remarks; on Monday, former SNL cast member Ego Nwodim posted Instagram stories from the gym responding to the monologue. Gillis had been hired onto the SNL cast in 2019 and then quickly fired after clips of racist jokes from his podcast surfaced.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 6 articles

2 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 2 of 3
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Dan Levy, Shane Gillis, Lisa Cusack and Kathy Griffin
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 3
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
Credits another outlet 0 of 3
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 3
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 13, 15:15 UTC by Fox News, naming its source.
Not counted 3
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Left-leaning coverage never reports Dan Levy's claim that silence about the joke helps create an environment of sexual assault. That claim is the Fox News headline and Daily Wire quoted it too. What left-leaning coverage quotes from Levy is the word "misogynists", plus a tie from the uproar to a Cornell scandal. The rest of his video was paraphrased as a plea for men to support women. The vocabulary split does the work of an argument. Right-leaning coverage brands Gillis's gym bit an "innocuous observation", while left-leaning coverage treats the same lines as a comment on women's bodies that missed the moment. One side is arguing about manners at the gym. The other is arguing about whether those lines should have aired at all. Readers are asked to accept a verdict already sitting in the adjectives. Did any woman who wears the shorts Gillis described speak on the record about the joke?
Bottom line

Fox News told the Gillis weekend as Dan Levy warning that quiet men feed sexual assault. NBC News used the same video and never printed that sentence.

The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • Dan Levy said more men need to oppose Gillis because complacency has created the environment in which women are sexually assaulted individual casein Fox News, Daily Wire · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • The gym bit was adapted from an episode of Gillis's Netflix show Tires contextin Daily Wire · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Lisa Cusack said a man noticing a skimpy outfit is not automatically a misogynist official statementin Fox News · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Gillis's team declined to comment official statementin Fox News · absent from left-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning coverage treated the monologue as misogynistic and “tone deaf,” especially as the country “reckons with the scandal over an alleged sexual assault at Cornell University.” NBC News highlighted Ego Nwodim’s mockery—she captioned gym photos “Whore reporting for duty” and “Getting my 30 grams of protein in after heauxing”—and Dan Levy’s argument that “Women wearing short shorts at the gym does not make them whores. It makes the men calling them whores misogynists.” Levy called women “superior human beings to men,” urged men to support them, and said male “complacency” around such remarks “has created the environment in which women are sexually assaulted,” turning a “crime” into a “conversation.” He added that the more men “objectify women in the media, the more that other men see them as objects and treat them as objects.”
The Right View
Right-leaning outlets framed the episode as a joke met with a liberal overreaction. Fox News quoted Lisa Cusack that it is not “either/or”: a woman in a skimpy outfit “isn’t necessarily a whore,” and a man noticing “isn’t automatically a misogynist.” The Daily Wire argued gym fashion has in fact become more revealing, that a glance is a normal “limbic system response” distinct from ogling, and that Levy’s leap from a comedy line to sexual assault collapses looking, creepiness, and crime. It said critics demand men “gouge out their eyes” while holding that “women are never responsible for any decision they make,” called Levy hypocritical for not similarly attacking males in women’s locker rooms, noted the bit was adapted from Gillis’s Netflix show Tires, and treated the outrage itself as the punchline: Gillis “point[ed] out the absurdities” and “the outrage that followed supplied the punchline.”
Our Take (balanced)
The left’s strongest argument is Levy’s distinction, backed by the actual wording of the bit: calling women “whores” for gym shorts on live television is a moral verdict on their bodies, not a neutral observation, and treating that language as harmless “conversation” rather than something men should reject is the complacency he says “has created the environment in which women are sexually assaulted.” The right’s strongest argument, with Cusack and the Daily Wire’s gym-floor descriptions as support, is that revealing athletic wear is a real, widely noticed shift, that noticing it is not assault, and that folding a crude joke into complicity with sexual violence erases the difference between a glance, ogling, and a crime while denying women agency over a social signal they chose. The unresolved tension is whether “whores” is illicit objectification men must police, or a blunt name for a style that carries meaning which, once chosen, cannot be placed entirely beyond comment.

6 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.